I don't remember seeing anything of the sort in my user agreement, and it really has no effect on the bandwidth.
I'll hit the second part first. I completely agree that it makes no difference and I'm paying for the bandwidth I should be allowed to use it myself on however many computer I have. As for the second, to quote the terms of use policy:
Prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, using the Service, Customer Equipment, or the Comcast Equipment to:
...
(x) connect multiple computers behind the cable modem to set up a LAN (Local Area Network) that in any manner would result in a violation of the terms of this Policy or an applicable Service plan
From the subscriber rules:
g. Theft of Service: You will not connect the Service or any Comcast Equipment to more computers, either on or outside of the Premises, than are reflected in your account with us. You acknowledge that any unauthorized receipt of the Service constitutes theft of service, which is a violation of federal law and can result in both civil and criminal penalties. In addition, if the violations are willful and for commercial advantage or private financial gain, the penalties may be increased.
Now, as I've been saying elsewhere around here, this has been this way for quite a while and no one I know has run into any issues with it. I just took it like, "Well, these are the rules, but we know that tons of people break them, and we'll only use them if you piss us off elsewhere." But, now they are crafting this "home networking" plan. That is, in fact, the whole point of this wifi thing, to give a box to home users to have multiple computers. There is an amendment to the terms for those who have that service, to quote the first part:
1. Use of Service. The Subscriber Agreement is hereby modified solely to permit you to use the Service in connection with the multiple connection of up to five (5) personal computing devices within your Premises to the Service (the "Comcast Home Networking Service") in accordance with Comcast's then-current published Comcast Home Networking Service description (which may be changed from time to time in our sole discretion).
So, now they have a system to get to charge you more for multiple computers and it is no longer "One computer, or the highway thing" it is now "One computer, pay more for 5, or the highway."
I'm in the same boat. My point was that while things are working, we aren't exactly on the up and up with their rules and this (to me at least) is a cause for some worry. For a while I didn't think it would mean anything since they had no alternative, but now with their "home networking plan" (which is really what this WiFi thing is for) is in the pipe I'm worried they are going to be more concerned since they can now push you towards paying them more money for it.
Yes, right now things are well and fine, and I'm reasonably pleased with the price/performance of what I'm getting, but that doesn't mean I support it.
You're both right and both wrong. A firewall doesn't mean anything unless it is doing NAT stuff smartly. A "normal" NAT will make a record of the client computer (your side) asking for information. That client computer makes outbound requests in increasing port numbers. The NAT takes the responce and matches it to this request from its table, and just forwards the info along. The issue comes in when you have two clients asking for information at the same time and their local port numbers for their requests are at widly different ends of the sequence. If the NAT is "normal" it just does the forwarded requests at these same port numbers (makes life easy). This is detacable by the ISP since they see several outbound requests originating from different (and seperately increasing) port numbers. If, however, your NAT is smarter and does the requsts itself in its own seperate increasing port number range and is smarter about the linking of requsts to the internal clients, then you remove this potential for detection.
I've rarely found a website (other than my own) that actually feeds me data at a speed that's anywhere near 3 Mbps, so that extra space within 3 to 4 Mbps is rarely going to be used.
I don't think the idea is that for personal use that your individual page loads will be better, the idea is that with the family of four at home in the evening each downloading an mp3, playing Enemy Territory, or downloading the latest red hat iso that the total bandwith will be greater for all of them so they cut into eachothers use less. It would be like getting larger plumbing from the water company (or increasing the system pressure, in eiter event increasing capacity) so two people could take a showers here at the same time (different showers), not that one person would bathe any quicker.
I half agree. That price is great for the first 3 months, but then it goes up to more than DSL prices in my area. I just want a decent speed (DSL or better) at a decent price that is always on AND doesn't want to get in my way*. For my income the $40+/mo. is a tad high, but I pay it since they are the only game in town (I live too far from telco home office for DSL). To me interent isn't like HBO where you get it cheap when there's a deal, cancel before the price goes up and wait for the deal to come around again in 2 or 3 months, I want a stable email address and a known network connection.
Plus, you admit to having a WAP and say "we" so I'm assuming you're running more than one computer. Are you paying the extra bunch of money to run multiple computers (with, as I understand it, a speed increase) or are you just violating your user agreement?
* - Verizon blocks inbound port 80 for me and comcast doesn't want more than one computer and yells at those at the top of the bell curve for bandwith use, not a set "this is what is reccomended, here's a way to meter yourself" but a sliding scale.
But I see no information about how quickly all of their machines can calculate an infinite loop. Perhaps we can work backwards then with this information (when known) to dervie the number of systems.
I used to hang out with him on an IRC server, then one day he up and quit. He also deleted all of his/. JEs one day and un-friended everyone. Don't let him get to you.
Sporty, good to see another good post of yours, but I hate to be the bearer of good news. I was talking to trif yesterday on IM and he said that apparently just after the story got accpeted here he got a call from the vendor about it being taken care of. Apparently the person on the phone mentioned, "You don't have to threaten us."
I'm not 100% sure if that is about the/. story, but this didn't make it to the front page so I'm assuming their servers will remain up.
Netstumbler software allows the existing laptop (the kids seem to have that already) to act as the detector. I know it measures signal strength as well as can interface with a GPS, but I do not know if it will map signal strength to position, or if it is strictly binary.
Re:How stupid do you have to be?
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
I wonder who I should accuse of attacking me?
Whoever it is, I am sure you can find some intelligence that they have weapons of mass destruction related program activities. That'll give you a two-fer for headline opportunity.
"I'm being DDOS'd by people with weapons of mass destruction related program activities!"
Re:I'm Doing My Part
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
not all people understand geek humor
Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!
In general IPv6 was pretty painless to setup, my biggest problems were caused by the fact I was using 6to4 which means my IPv6 addresses are based on my IPv4 address, which isn't static, so it took a bit of scripting to get everything to happen correctly when my v4 address changed (changing routes etc).
Care to write a how-to? You have a/. journal as well as that LUG that you can link to. I know I'm interested in not re-inventing the wheel and perhaps there are others, too.
Just ignore the little N-Gauge toys and go with the more popular HO-Guage as you will find more equipment available and as you grow older the largher scale will work better with your eyes when it comes to the finer detail work. Plus I think the track looks more realistic.
Oh... wait, that's n-gage... well, that's just a bunch of hooey.
Yeah, I was impressed when we were making 6" wafers a few years ago and darn proud of it. I remember back when they were the size of a US quarter dollar.
I worked in final visual inspection on a 6" line and that was very dicy. You'd get someone failing too many parts, whole wafers in some cases due to what their eye saw as too much FLUC. Tricky balancing act since FLUC identification is more of an art than a science (metering thing is a science with acceptable ranges and such) in that we didn't want to ship things that would fail in the wild, but we didn't want to fail too many things and incrase costs (a wafer at the final end has had a lot of effort put into it).
Oh wait, I just re-read your post. Where you meaning sarcasim or did you not understand what they were talking about?
It worked by a series of light sensors. From the drawing you'd think 8 total, four on each "side" from one in each corner. In reality it only had 6 I think, two of the spots weren't life. There were also A/B buttons along with start/select and several slider switches to set which setup (pin out) you used.
It wounld sense the change in light of you moving your hand over a spot.
It sorta worked, but it had problems with misreads (not reading an actual movemens) and false positives (reading the shadow cast by accident on another sensor).
You could lay it flat and play games like metroid my moving your hands all over, but you looked like a DJ on smack. It had the 90 degree setup where it would sense combinations of moves, but I don't recall what that was for. Tyson was the only one that used a slightly more open setup - like 100 degrees. As I never had that game I can't really say what that got you, but commercials indicated you could punch at the thing and it would register it was a punch in the game.
The stick I mentioned earlier was for flying/driving games and the buttons would trigger the sensors for A/B buttons. But, the ability to leave them constantly depressed (for RC Pro-AM) was impossible. If you had something that A would decrease throttle (B to inccrease) for example, I guess it might work, but nothing like that comes to mind. instead of it sensing the direct movement of the stick it relised on the sensors in the board to see that you were twisting the stick or not and was just as reliable as without the stick (see problems listed above).
I came across it a few years ago in the orginal box. I took it out and I had carefully put everything back, including the foam between sides. It still had that new U-Force smell, something I have never experienced since, but I do associate with a lame failure.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't remember seeing anything of the sort in my user agreement, and it really has no effect on the bandwidth.
...
I'll hit the second part first. I completely agree that it makes no difference and I'm paying for the bandwidth I should be allowed to use it myself on however many computer I have. As for the second, to quote the terms of use policy:
Prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, using the Service, Customer Equipment, or the Comcast Equipment to:
(x) connect multiple computers behind the cable modem to set up a LAN (Local Area Network) that in any manner would result in a violation of the terms of this Policy or an applicable Service plan
From the subscriber rules:
g. Theft of Service: You will not connect the Service or any Comcast Equipment to more computers, either on or outside of the Premises, than are reflected in your account with us. You acknowledge that any unauthorized receipt of the Service constitutes theft of service, which is a violation of federal law and can result in both civil and criminal penalties. In addition, if the violations are willful and for commercial advantage or private financial gain, the penalties may be increased.
Now, as I've been saying elsewhere around here, this has been this way for quite a while and no one I know has run into any issues with it. I just took it like, "Well, these are the rules, but we know that tons of people break them, and we'll only use them if you piss us off elsewhere." But, now they are crafting this "home networking" plan. That is, in fact, the whole point of this wifi thing, to give a box to home users to have multiple computers. There is an amendment to the terms for those who have that service, to quote the first part:
1. Use of Service. The Subscriber Agreement is hereby modified solely to permit you to use the Service in connection with the multiple connection of up to five (5) personal computing devices within your Premises to the Service (the "Comcast Home Networking Service") in accordance with Comcast's then-current published Comcast Home Networking Service description (which may be changed from time to time in our sole discretion).
So, now they have a system to get to charge you more for multiple computers and it is no longer "One computer, or the highway thing" it is now "One computer, pay more for 5, or the highway."
I'm in the same boat. My point was that while things are working, we aren't exactly on the up and up with their rules and this (to me at least) is a cause for some worry. For a while I didn't think it would mean anything since they had no alternative, but now with their "home networking plan" (which is really what this WiFi thing is for) is in the pipe I'm worried they are going to be more concerned since they can now push you towards paying them more money for it.
Yes, right now things are well and fine, and I'm reasonably pleased with the price/performance of what I'm getting, but that doesn't mean I support it.
I hit this earlier and I'm not copying and pasting.
You're both right and both wrong. A firewall doesn't mean anything unless it is doing NAT stuff smartly. A "normal" NAT will make a record of the client computer (your side) asking for information. That client computer makes outbound requests in increasing port numbers. The NAT takes the responce and matches it to this request from its table, and just forwards the info along. The issue comes in when you have two clients asking for information at the same time and their local port numbers for their requests are at widly different ends of the sequence. If the NAT is "normal" it just does the forwarded requests at these same port numbers (makes life easy). This is detacable by the ISP since they see several outbound requests originating from different (and seperately increasing) port numbers. If, however, your NAT is smarter and does the requsts itself in its own seperate increasing port number range and is smarter about the linking of requsts to the internal clients, then you remove this potential for detection.
I've rarely found a website (other than my own) that actually feeds me data at a speed that's anywhere near 3 Mbps, so that extra space within 3 to 4 Mbps is rarely going to be used.
I don't think the idea is that for personal use that your individual page loads will be better, the idea is that with the family of four at home in the evening each downloading an mp3, playing Enemy Territory, or downloading the latest red hat iso that the total bandwith will be greater for all of them so they cut into eachothers use less. It would be like getting larger plumbing from the water company (or increasing the system pressure, in eiter event increasing capacity) so two people could take a showers here at the same time (different showers), not that one person would bathe any quicker.
I half agree. That price is great for the first 3 months, but then it goes up to more than DSL prices in my area. I just want a decent speed (DSL or better) at a decent price that is always on AND doesn't want to get in my way*. For my income the $40+/mo. is a tad high, but I pay it since they are the only game in town (I live too far from telco home office for DSL). To me interent isn't like HBO where you get it cheap when there's a deal, cancel before the price goes up and wait for the deal to come around again in 2 or 3 months, I want a stable email address and a known network connection.
Plus, you admit to having a WAP and say "we" so I'm assuming you're running more than one computer. Are you paying the extra bunch of money to run multiple computers (with, as I understand it, a speed increase) or are you just violating your user agreement?
* - Verizon blocks inbound port 80 for me and comcast doesn't want more than one computer and yells at those at the top of the bell curve for bandwith use, not a set "this is what is reccomended, here's a way to meter yourself" but a sliding scale.
But I see no information about how quickly all of their machines can calculate an infinite loop. Perhaps we can work backwards then with this information (when known) to dervie the number of systems.
In the words of Homer when he didn't have the crayon in his head:
"We're rich... rich like astronauts!"
Sporty flies off at nothing most times.
/. JEs one day and un-friended everyone. Don't let him get to you.
I used to hang out with him on an IRC server, then one day he up and quit. He also deleted all of his
Does this mean that the radio show is back in action?
Sporty, good to see another good post of yours, but I hate to be the bearer of good news. I was talking to trif yesterday on IM and he said that apparently just after the story got accpeted here he got a call from the vendor about it being taken care of. Apparently the person on the phone mentioned, "You don't have to threaten us."
/. story, but this didn't make it to the front page so I'm assuming their servers will remain up.
I'm not 100% sure if that is about the
Parteners are people who end up testifying against you in court.
Spouses are protected by priviledge.
agreed (in both idea and the down-mod-bait, but I just got an un-fair redundant so who cares now)
It wasn't just the "also" but it was also the use of words with also.
also because its not tightly integrated...
Also because tickets are not tightly integrated...
Not to mention that its is the wrong its I do beleive.
Biggest Online Gamers
Great, so they are old, but do you really have to call them "fat," too?
Can I drink from the FIRE HOSE?
Netstumbler software allows the existing laptop (the kids seem to have that already) to act as the detector. I know it measures signal strength as well as can interface with a GPS, but I do not know if it will map signal strength to position, or if it is strictly binary.
I wonder who I should accuse of attacking me?
Whoever it is, I am sure you can find some intelligence that they have weapons of mass destruction related program activities. That'll give you a two-fer for headline opportunity.
"I'm being DDOS'd by people with weapons of mass destruction related program activities!"
not all people understand geek humor
Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
I mean, if I went around sayin' I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!
IIRC Lotus Notes (an IBM product) supports an instant messageing system called "Sametime."
How much more enterprise savy could you need?
In general IPv6 was pretty painless to setup, my biggest problems were caused by the fact I was using 6to4 which means my IPv6 addresses are based on my IPv4 address, which isn't static, so it took a bit of scripting to get everything to happen correctly when my v4 address changed (changing routes etc).
/. journal as well as that LUG that you can link to. I know I'm interested in not re-inventing the wheel and perhaps there are others, too.
Care to write a how-to? You have a
Beds should be used for two things only - sleep and sex.
You left out perhaps building a small fort, too!
(Simpsons reference, if you don't get it, it should get out less)
Oh, well, sure, it was an IT job. If it has been a position for say.. a fireman, then things would have been different.
Just ignore the little N-Gauge toys and go with the more popular HO-Guage as you will find more equipment available and as you grow older the largher scale will work better with your eyes when it comes to the finer detail work. Plus I think the track looks more realistic.
Oh... wait, that's n-gage... well, that's just a bunch of hooey.
Yeah, I was impressed when we were making 6" wafers a few years ago and darn proud of it. I remember back when they were the size of a US quarter dollar.
I worked in final visual inspection on a 6" line and that was very dicy. You'd get someone failing too many parts, whole wafers in some cases due to what their eye saw as too much FLUC. Tricky balancing act since FLUC identification is more of an art than a science (metering thing is a science with acceptable ranges and such) in that we didn't want to ship things that would fail in the wild, but we didn't want to fail too many things and incrase costs (a wafer at the final end has had a lot of effort put into it).
Oh wait, I just re-read your post. Where you meaning sarcasim or did you not understand what they were talking about?
It worked by a series of light sensors. From the drawing you'd think 8 total, four on each "side" from one in each corner. In reality it only had 6 I think, two of the spots weren't life. There were also A/B buttons along with start/select and several slider switches to set which setup (pin out) you used.
It wounld sense the change in light of you moving your hand over a spot.
It sorta worked, but it had problems with misreads (not reading an actual movemens) and false positives (reading the shadow cast by accident on another sensor).
You could lay it flat and play games like metroid my moving your hands all over, but you looked like a DJ on smack. It had the 90 degree setup where it would sense combinations of moves, but I don't recall what that was for. Tyson was the only one that used a slightly more open setup - like 100 degrees. As I never had that game I can't really say what that got you, but commercials indicated you could punch at the thing and it would register it was a punch in the game.
The stick I mentioned earlier was for flying/driving games and the buttons would trigger the sensors for A/B buttons. But, the ability to leave them constantly depressed (for RC Pro-AM) was impossible. If you had something that A would decrease throttle (B to inccrease) for example, I guess it might work, but nothing like that comes to mind. instead of it sensing the direct movement of the stick it relised on the sensors in the board to see that you were twisting the stick or not and was just as reliable as without the stick (see problems listed above).
I came across it a few years ago in the orginal box. I took it out and I had carefully put everything back, including the foam between sides. It still had that new U-Force smell, something I have never experienced since, but I do associate with a lame failure.